Calculating Poverty
Numbers released from the Census Bureau last week put over 14% of US residents below the poverty line. Unfortunately, the number here in NC was even worse, at nearly 17%. But just as the unemployment rate does not adequately reflect the actual number of unemployed people (merely those seeking unemployment benefits), the same is true with the poverty line.
There are generally two methods of calculating poverty: absolute and relative. Absolute poverty is achieved when an individual is unable to provide for the basics of sustaining life. The U.S. poverty line is an example of this, since it was originally calculated from the sum of the cost of basic, necessary items, without which is it assumed a person cannot subsist. Only two countries, the United States and the United Kingdom, measure poverty in this way. Relative poverty, however, is instead based on the lack of money available to an individual compared to the rest of society. Relative poverty uses the average existing standard living and determines how many people fall above and below that standard. Many countries define the poverty line as half of the average family’s income. There in inherent problems with both systems, with academics on both sides of the debate.
The Millennium Development Goals developed in the mid-90′s by world leaders to eradicate poverty are quickly approaching their due date of 2015, and the meeting at the United Nations this week to assess the status of the goals has not exactly been rosy. By the UN’s own assessment, “It is clear that improvements in the lives of the poor have been unacceptably slow, and some hard-won gains are being eroded by the climate, food and economic crises.”
While we can go on and on about the “correct” way of measuring poverty, perhaps our time is better spent simply recognizing that many, many people are in need of help right now – and then do something about it.
Facebook
LinkedIn
RSS
Email
Twitter